Discussion Questions

David Bercot opens with the Columbia and Challenger disasters to argue that “little things can have an enormous impact on big things”; what does his “capital letter” analogy suggest about how God expects His people to handle small details of truth, and what does it expose about our willingness to let “small” distortions slide? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does Bercot’s “capital letter” example say about how God wants us to handle small details of truth? What does it reveal about how easily we ignore “small” changes that can twist the message?

In Romans 6:15, Bercot contrasts “not under law but under grace” with the 1611 KJV’s “not under **the** Law but under grace”; how does each reading reshape what “grace” means in practice, and what kind of Christian life (obedience, holiness, repentance) naturally follows from each reading? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How does “not under law but under grace” feel different from “not under the Law but under grace” in Romans 6:15? How would each one shape daily Christian life like obedience, holiness, and repentance?

Bercot claims the early Christians believed we “maintain our saved relationship through an obedient love faith relationship with Christ,” and he ties that to Jeremiah’s prophecy of laws written on the heart; what assumptions about God’s character and covenant faithfulness are built into that early-Christian framework, and where does it most directly collide with modern evangelical instincts? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If staying saved means an ongoing, obedient love relationship with Christ, what does that assume about God’s character and His promises? Where does that idea clash most with common modern evangelical thinking?

Bercot says Luther “taught a totally different gospel,” redefining “law” and “works,” and even added “alone” to Romans 3:28 in his German Bible; what do you think is at stake spiritually when someone believes they must “fix” Scripture’s meaning to protect a theological system, and how do you see that temptation showing up today (even in subtler forms)? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What is at risk when someone thinks they need to adjust Scripture’s meaning to protect their theology? Where do you see that same temptation today, even in smaller or quieter ways?

Bercot argues English capitalization rules imply “Law” should be capitalized when it refers to the Mosaic Law, and he calls lowercasing it “scandalous…tampering”; what standard of honesty should Christians demand from translators and teachers, and how should a serious Christian respond when they suspect bias—without sliding into cynicism or conspiracy thinking? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What kind of honesty should Christians expect from Bible translators and teachers? If you suspect bias, how should you respond in a serious way without becoming cynical or paranoid?

He claims the NIV/ESV often capitalize “law” in the Gospels but switch to lowercase in Acts/epistles, and he highlights Hebrews 10 where the NIV lowercases “law of Moses” while capitalizing “Day”; what do you make of his argument that this pattern “predisposes” readers toward Luther’s framework, and what evidence would you want to see to confirm or challenge his charge of deliberate intent? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What do you think about his claim that some translations capitalize “Law” in the Gospels but not in Acts and the letters, and that this pushes readers toward Luther’s view? What proof would you want before agreeing it was done on purpose?

Bercot insists the “overarching, volatile issue of the First Century Church” was circumcision and Gentiles being compelled to keep the Mosaic Law, not “faith versus obedience to Christ”; how does reading Galatians 2 and Acts 15 through that lens change what you think Paul was fighting for, and what popular “Pauline” talking points start to look questionable? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If the big first-century fight was about circumcision and forcing Gentiles to keep the Mosaic Law, how does that change the way you read Galatians 2 and Acts 15? Which popular “Paul” slogans start to sound less convincing?

In the Jerusalem letter (Acts 15), Bercot notes the apostles say nothing like “faith alone” and instead give concrete prohibitions to Gentile believers; what does that letter reveal about how the apostles expected grace, obedience, and communal holiness to function together, and what parts of modern church culture feel embarrassed by that kind of instruction? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Since Acts 15 doesn’t say “faith alone” and instead gives Gentiles clear rules, what does that show about how grace and obedience were meant to work together? What parts of today’s church culture would feel uncomfortable with that kind of direct instruction?

On “letter vs Spirit,” Bercot argues Paul is using a Greek idiom (spirit = intent/purpose) rather than contrasting written laws with the Holy Spirit; if Paul means “the Spirit of the Law” (justice, mercy, faith, love) rather than meticulous literalism, what would it look like for a church to obey the “Spirit of the Law” while still taking holiness seriously—and where do you see modern Christians doing the opposite? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If “letter vs Spirit” means the law’s true purpose (justice, mercy, love) instead of picky rule-keeping, what would a church look like that follows that purpose and still takes holiness seriously? Where do you see Christians doing the opposite today?

Near the end, Bercot says, “take charge of your own Bible study” and suggests rereading Paul by capitalizing “law” when context points to Moses (especially when circumcision is the issue); what specific habits would you need to change to actually do this kind of “spiritual sleuthing,” and what fears (loss of certainty, challenging favorite teachers, destabilizing doctrines) might keep you from doing it? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What daily study habits would you need to change to recheck Paul the way Bercot suggests, like noting when “law” means Moses and circumcision is the issue? What fears might stop you, like losing certainty, questioning favorite teachers, or rethinking key beliefs?